One of these pictures was shot with a 5D MKII. One of these was shot with a Hasselblad 39MP digital back/camera
.
Which is which?
One of these pictures was shot with a 5D MKII. One of these was shot with a Hasselblad 39MP digital back/camera.
Which is which?
Hmmm…. I see your point in doing this. Just a guess here, but I’m going to say the bottom is the Hasselblad.
Dunno about the camera, but I prefer the lighting and colour in the bottom one.
I will reveal tomorrow which one was shot with the Hasselblad. As for the color and lighting… I tried to keep the lighting consistent, the color shift is due to the processing perhaps. Both images were processed in Capture One Pro and made into their versions of TIF files. The images were then converted to 72 dpi jpegs in PS. The Canon image was shot at ISO 100. The Hasselblad at ISO 50.
The top one!
Isn’t the Hasselblad a 48×36mm sensor and the Canon a 24×36mm sensor? I don’t see the empirical impact of this test yet. I’m not even sure anyone is making this claim you are trying to disprove…
Why did you choose to make the model different sizes within the frame? Doesn’t that skew your results?
The top one is the $$$ camera
I think the point Greg is trying to make is when a lot of our media is being viewed in a digital format and when the image is being sized down to 72 dpi there is no need to spend a yearly salary on a single camera.
@Theron
I don’t think he’s necessarily saying anyone claims to tell the difference. He’s merely illustrating the point that you can’t tell (easily, without guessing) the difference. It’s just meant to start a discussion about the impact that web display could have on digital workflow (or at least digital input), and whether it’s going to be necessary for rental houses to carry the next 857-megapixel PhaseOne back.
For the record, my guess is that the top one was taken with the Hasselblad, but my hunch is not based on image quality, more on what lenses it appears you were using.
and of course if you are curious enough to check metadata, the top one is ‘blad.
and i wish i had one because while no one can tell at this size and resolution, i bet you could if you made a 3′x4′ print, which i sometimes do (with my canon 5dmk2, sigh.)
@Chris.
Agreed!
I simply didn’t find the experiment that compelling, or accurate. We could also start to include random film cameras, a 7D, and keep playing the game forever? No? Different tools, different attitude behind the camera.
Photographers have always made the choice of which tool(s) to use for their output, and voice. The topic just doesn’t seem to have a lot of tooth, but it’s being presented as big! eh!
The bottom one looks like the more aggressive Canon tone-curve to me.
Of course there’s no meaningful difference other than that at this kind of size, and under controlled lighting.
You could extend this much further, here’s a comparison I did under similar controlled lighting circumstances between Canon G9 and Nikon D70s a long time ago: http://www.flickr.com/photos/janekm/2706857827/ (again, the Canon with the more agressive tone curve even from the RAW)
Difficult, very difficult. But ’round here we vote for the top one
My bet is for the top one. It seems it has more detail in the forehead.
top one…i think?
The point is that it’s so hard to tell and more and more shoots are going to be for electronic media that, for me, it’s not worth the extra $26,000. for the Hasselblad. Sure, it impresses clients on big shoots to have a complicated camera, and if you shoot and print 3′x4′ prints you might need the Hasselblad, but otherwise, I’ll stick with the 5D MKII on the bottom.
Bottom is shot on the back.
DH is correct, as a check of the metadata revealed: The top image is the Hasselblad image, and the bottom one was shot with the Canon.